.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

filling the void

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Production Values

Yesterday and today I came across some short movies. Some were fan made, others were not. Some were in between. None of them were "real" movies, in the sense that they were feature length, or big hollywood productions. While the acting, props and settings were all fine, you could see that there was a distinct texture difference between them. One of them (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf75iUZVn7Y)(1) had a very professional look. The other (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9UwlAAnlmg)(2) did not. Sure, the budgets were different, but the acting seemed similar in quality, and a behind-the-scenes look at the latter one revealed perfectly professional looking equipment, lighting and make-up. Therefor, I wonder, what's the difference in end result? Why do they look fundamentally different? Clearly it's not just a "throw more money at it" issue. Neither of these are simple home videos, they are more-or-less professional productions. The movie in between (http://kinostalker.com/?lang=en)(3) was more professional, and probably longer, than the second, but clearly suffered from the same home video look. Is this a matter of post processing or using filters or lighting or what? I'd be very happy to hear your thoughts.

Labels: , , , ,

2 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home